Obama and the $50 Million Inaugural

Privately Funded Celebration With Many $50,000 Donors

Jan 10, 2009 Martha R. Gore

Obama celebrations will cost $50 million dollars at a time when over 2.6 million Americans have lost their jobs and the highest unemployment rate in sixteen years.

Should Obama and his supporters spend $24-$50 million for the inauguration at a time when the United States is in in the midst of a Recession and facing the highest unemployment rate in sixteen years with 2.6 million having lost their jobs? Who are the donors so gladly paying as much as $50,000 to participate and hosting galas for Congressional members as well?

History of Inaugurations During Economic Downturns

Many incoming-presidents have opted out of the extravagant inaugural galas during economic downturns. Incoming U.S. Presidents presiding over a deeply depressed economy include:

  • President-elect Warren G. Harding, instead of holding a gala, attended at private party at home.
  • Presidents Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt opted for charity balls.
  • President Jimmy Carter called for a maximum of $25 on ticket prices. President Woodrow Wilson refused to have an inaugural ball.

Beginning with Harry Truman, with the exception of Jimmy Carter, the cost of the galas has increased dramatically. It went from one gala in Truman's time to five for President John F. Kennedy, culminating with 14 in 1997 for President Bill Clinton. Bush had eight balls in 2001 and nine in 2005. (ABC News, 11/19/2008)

Obama and Congressional Donor List

Obama's campaign has capped donors to the inauguration at $50,000 and banned lobbyist and corporations from contributing to inaugural events. Corporate donors, such as Florida Power & Lights and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida have gotten around this by contributing to private parties. Critics such as Public Citizen note that most contributors to the presidential inaugural committee and the private parts, including those for Congress members, are well-connected political donors.(McClatchy News, 01/09/09)

Donors, including businesses and their lobbying arms, are helping to underwrite the 10 official celebrations. These include corporations and individuals giving $50,000 such as:

  • American Airlines
  • Chicago-based Exelon Utility
  • The Nuclear Energy Institute
  • Director and Producer Steven and his wife, Kate Capshaw Spielberg
  • John Keane of CBS-Viacom
  • Louis Susman of Citibank

Congress is not without it donors. Although an ethics law passed barred lawmakers from attending parties in their honor but left a loop hole for inauguration-related events. For example, textbook publishers and educational-software providers are helping to pay for a ball honoring Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, chairman of the education committee. The Creative Coalition, and entertainment industry group, will host a gala with more than 40 lawmakers as "honorary hosts." (USA Today, 12/23/08)

At a time when many Americans are suffering economically, and when Obama has promised "Change", some wonder whether it is appropriate to continue the excessive presidential inaugural festivities, whether being paid for with private or public funds. As the Obama Donor List is scrutinized, there may be some suspicion that Obama and Congress are not much different than the administrations that preceded them.

The copyright of the article Obama and the $50 Million Inaugural in American Affairs is owned by Martha R. Gore. Permission to republish Obama and the $50 Million Inaugural in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
Dancing at th Ball, Fotosearch
Dancing at th Ball
Dancing at the Ball, Fotosearch
Dancing at the Ball
  
What do you think about this article?
NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
post your comment
What is 3+6?

Comments

Jan 14, 2009 4:35 AM
Guest :
Dear Martha R Gore,
Thank you for your very well-documented article. This is strange enough that we don’t hear so much in the “traditional media” about the cost of this celebration. Not that it will change anything to the US economic crisis. But it is quite disturbing, symbolically, to realize that the president-to-be, who made so much fuss about being “one of us”, is ready to spend 50 million dollars on celebrations while thousands of people are losing their jobs, homes, lives… Even though I think he had no choice but to celebrate, since it’s such a historic event for America.
Funnily enough, we’ve had a situation that one could find a bit similar, in France, about 18 months ago, when President Nicolas Sarkozy was elected. He kept repeating during his campaign that we would have to be careful because of the lack of money. Then, a few months later, we found out that he had widely increased the Elysee (the French equivalent of the White House) expenditures and doubled his personal wages.
After reading your article, I do have a question: did you try to interview someone from the Democratic Party? It would be interesting to hear what they have to say about that (and if they didn't want to comment upon this it would also be important information!).
Jan 14, 2009 4:44 AM
Guest :
Dear Martha R Gore,
Thank you for your very well-documented article. This is strange enough that we don’t hear so much in the “traditional media” about the cost of this celebration. Not that it will change anything to the US economic crisis. But it is quite disturbing, symbolically, to realize that the president-to-be, who made so much fuss about being “one of us”, is ready to spend 50 million dollars on celebrations while thousands of people are losing their jobs, homes, lives… Even though I think he had no choice but to celebrate, since it’s such a historic event for America.
Funnily enough, we’ve had a situation that one could find a bit similar, in France, about 18 months ago, when President Nicolas Sarkozy was elected. He kept repeating during his campaign that we would have to be careful because of the lack of money. Then, a few months later, we found out that he had widely increased the Elysee (the French equivalent of the White House) expenditures and doubled his personal wages.
After reading your article, I do have a question: did you try to interview someone from the Democratic Party? It would be interesting to hear what they have to say about that (and if they didn't want to comment upon this it would also be important information!).
Jan 19, 2009 7:19 AM
Guest :
After Tuesday festivities, the Washington Machine will continue rolling as it has in the past. There will be no change as a different member of the monarchy takes the office. Monetary restraints are for the American people and not for aristocracy. This is a rich boys club and they do not have to follow any guidelines when it comes to expenditures and fiscal responsibility. Look who he picked for Secretary of the Treasury. A tax delinquent who's only qualification is he didn't pay his taxes till he was caught. The "Do as I say and not as I do" has been a motto in American politicians as long as there has been an America. By the people, for the people is nice cliche but the reality is the congressional leaders operate in a different world and very out touch with the country as a whole. What a waste of money.
3 Comments